Posted on May 10, 2011 by wp
Posted on April 1, 2011 by wp
A Nova Scotia man has had an 8 and a half year prison sentence for impaired driving upheld by the Province’s Court of Appeal. He was convicted in February of impaired driving, leaving the scene of an accident, and driving while prohibited. He is also subject to a lifetime driving ban.
Posted on March 30, 2011 by wp
A British Columbia study was recently conducted to determine the percentage of drivers who use marijuana before operating a motor vehicle. Drivers in Vancouver, Saanich, Abbotsford, Prince George and Kelowna were tested orally between the hours of 9pm and 3am. Of the nearly 3000 drivers who participated in the study, more than 200 tested positive for the presence of drugs in their system.
Posted on March 22, 2011 by wp
Posted on February 25, 2011 by wp
Arrests for impaired driving are not the only consequences that can flow from alcohol. For John Galliano, whose blood alcohol level was reported to be 101mg in 100mL of blood at the time of his arrest, I’m sure he’s well aware of this fact.
Posted on February 25, 2011 by wp
I was very pleased to receive some kind letters from two of my recent clients after I successfully fought their 90-day Immediate Roadside Prohibition from driving. I’d like to share their words with you:
“I want to thank you most sincerely for your incredible service.
Receiving an IRP was one of the low points of my adult life. Speaking to other attorneys in town was a demoralizing experience, and I didn’t have any faith that the substantial investment in their services would have much of a chance of yielding a positive outcome.
From the moment that I made contact with you, it was clear that I was dealing with a keen professional. You were the only person I spoke with that articulated a sensible plan of action, while being straightforward about your rates over the phone. What’s more, your prices were by far and away, the most reasonable of anyone I spoke with.
Your professionalism continued throughout the process, keeping me informed at every step along the way. The fact that you were able to secure a positive outcome for me indicates that I did indeed make the very best choice in you as an Attorney.
Your saving my driving record has restored my career and so much more than I can articulate in a brief note.
I owe you a deep debt of gratitude. ” J.M.
February 22, 2011
Posted on February 22, 2011 by wp
Posted on February 18, 2011 by wp
When you are stopped at the roadside for an impaired driving investigation, the police will often ask you to blow into a roadside breath testing device. These are known in law as Approved Screening Devices (ASDs).
But the ASD is fallible. It cannot distinguish between mouth alcohol and alcohol in the body. It is the responsibility of the police to ensure that they are using the ASD properly and are not using it in circumstances where the results could be contaminated by the presence of mouth alcohol.
Posted on February 15, 2011 by wp
Posted on February 8, 2011 by wp
A judge in Michigan has conducted two studies to address the well-known CSI-effect.
For those of you who are unfamiliar, the CSI-effect is the theory that jurors who have seen a great deal of television shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, and the like are more likely to expect sophisticated DNA and technological evidence to be presented in murder trials. This has been believed to have had devastating impacts on the administration of justice. It is believed that as jurors grow accustomed to technology that may not be available, or even exist, in certain cases, the potential for convictions and/or acquittals that are not founded on the evidence increases.
The Chief Judge of the Washtenaw County in Ann Arbour has attempted to investigate this problem by conducting two studies. In each of them, potential jurors were asked what kind of evidence they would expect to see in the trials of different crimes. Those who watched CSIhad higher expectations of the evidence presented in criminal trials, than those who did not view the program. However, the expectations of jurors did not translate into a higher propensity to convict an accused.
The results of the study found other surprising results, however. Potential jurors were asked about their familiarity and use of different technology, such as smart phones, computers, and GPS equipment. Those who were more well-versed in developing technology had higher expectations of the evidence than those who were not familiar with these devices. Again, this difference in expectations did not seem to produce any significant difference in the results of the trial.
The conclusion of the Chief Judge was that the CSI-effect is, in fact, a myth. However, the implications of the study are interesting: do we, as a society, now examine circumstances more closely as a result of our increased use of technology? Has the advent of technology and its role in our lives impacted the way we view the world to such an extent that we are more likely to take a more scientific approach in assessing the circumstances of a given situation?
I’m not sure. I don’t know that I can answer these questions. What I do know, however, is that a lot of the evidence and investigative strategies seen on programs like CSI are a far cry from the realities of criminal justice and its administration.